Mailing-List: contact commons-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: "Jakarta Commons Developers List" <commons-dev@jakarta.apache.org>
Received-SPF: pass (asf.osuosl.org: local policy)
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws;
  s=s1024; d=btopenworld.com;
  h=Received:Message-ID:Date:From:User-Agent:X-Accept-Language:MIME-Version:To:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:X-Antivirus:X-Antivirus-Status;
  b=1N0b/SJ4OyispUjCyPiedevlhWw7HuA673JzR62PNMVM3SdLQeeJrWgxYMUfDDIPnK/+qx+IAgG3x1c0Tjqv7m5yLj/+00ybCm1FALPzcJPIfGbmdx+DqSVSsOj46hXo2a8N4h5efnoaczyc6HeeQTBwoqeKQEr3F2N3ZKkildA=
  ;
Message-ID: <450350BC.50604@btopenworld.com>
Date: Sun, 10 Sep 2006 00:39:40 +0100
From: Stephen Colebourne <scolebourne@btopenworld.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.2 (Windows/20050317)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Jakarta Commons Developers List <commons-dev@jakarta.apache.org>
Subject: [PROPOSAL] Commons and JDK5, was VOTE Release [net] version 2.0
References: <45019E8F.2050108@eircom.net> <4503458A.6030309@javactivity.org>
In-Reply-To: <4503458A.6030309@javactivity.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Steve Cohen wrote:
> I am not ready to vote yet on this until there is a discussion about 
> what this release means.  Will commons-net-2.0 become the "official" 
> release, with previous versions relegated to "backward compatibility" 
> support?  If so, this may be premature as Sun is still supporting 
> JDK-1.4.2-x.
> 
> But I don't think we should stand in the way of progress either.  Rory, 
> can you comment on what are the specific new features that demand JDK 
> 5.0 support?
> 
> How have other jakarta-commons projects handled this?  Are there any 
> official versions that require 1.5?  Are there projects that have two 
> "official" releases?

I see this as a positive step (a JDK 1.5 only release).
I also see this as the right jump (from JDK 1.2/1.3 to 1.5).

However, I believe that commons holds an almost unique place in Java 
development being the lowest layer in many many open source projects. As 
such making an incompatible major version change is a *very* big deal.

[PROPOSAL]
As such, I would like to propose that projects creating a JDK1.5 only 
release should use a new package name. Thus, in this case, the release 
would use the package  org.apache.commons.net5.*.

With this change, a user can have both the old and the new commons-net 
jars in their classpath without any conflicts. Note that these users may 
be different OSS projects, which may upgrade at different times.

Users wishing to migrate from one version to another can simply do a 
global search and replace on the package name.

We must not underestimate the significance of the low-level position of 
commons in the Java OSS, and proprietry, communities. A clear and 
planned migration strategy for all our modules is needed.

Stephen


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: commons-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: commons-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org